(Original post by CyclopsRock)
I honestly didn't realise you'd started to debate. Why did you ask me if I supported the right to strike? I'd clearly explained that I did, and why - I also explained why I thought, in a Libertarian society, the issue would be no where near as polarising. You just dismissed this, then asked me again if I supported striking. At no point did you actually discuss anything.

I didn't just dismiss it. I'm simply asking why the libertarians on here are very critical of striking, unions, and the government improving pay for public sector workers. The Libs on here are sort of in 'awe' of the private sector - they strike as well, it's just not publicised as much.

(Original post by mevidek)
Firstly, it was an example of the injustice - most people work harder than bankers, but get paid a lot less. I don't think it's right, which is why I gave you an example of this inequality.

Secondly, a state-controlled economy is easier for the government for pay workers the adequate amount for what they do. Even in a free market equality, there's clearly more to making salaries fairer than basing them solely on supply and demand. It should also be based on the work they do, and the hours they work.

Thirdly and finally, of course a person's skills and experience should impact their wage, but the Government can also reward people for the work they do. There's a lot more to it.

Private companies pay their employees fair wages yet this has rarely been achieved through striking. Private companies must compete for labour with other companies therefore they must increase wages to attract them. The public sector must do the same, therefore because of this competition with the public sector wages will remain fair.

(Original post by mevidek)
I didn't just dismiss it. I'm simply asking why the libertarians on here are very critical of striking, unions, and the government improving pay for public sector workers. The Libs on here are sort of in 'awe' of the private sector - they strike as well, it's just not publicised as much.

Yeah, and I discussed that exact issue. I'm confused - when you quote me and ask me questions, are you actually asking me, or are you asking other people? I have to assume, now, the latter.

(Original post by JPKC)
Hmmm so actually you don't support collective bargaining rights. Why? Because you've just said you don't support bargaining, and you don't support the collective exercise of a group's fundamental right to control the supply of their own labour.

No one's saying that that's a right. Groups, though, should be able to negotiate with their employees - their labour is all they have on their side of the table. Unions are a crucial necessity of a healthy labour market.

No, i do support collective bargaining as that should be an option that is open to them. What i do not support is collective strike action designed to amplify any consequences of said strike action. I am not saying that negotiations should not take place, i am saying that any demands they make should be conceded to on merit rather than via threats.

They can control their own Labour by leaving one organisation and getting a job in another. They cannot however agree to work x amount of days and go on strike.

(Original post by CyclopsRock)
Yeah, and I discussed that exact issue. I'm confused - when you quote me and ask me questions, are you actually asking me, or are you asking other people? I have to assume, now, the latter.

Of course I'm asking you, but in general I'm simply asking why you libertarians are so critical of the public sector.

(Original post by internetguru)
Private companies pay their employees fair wages yet this has rarely been achieved through striking. Private companies must compete for labour with other companies therefore they must increase wages to attract them. The public sector must do the same, therefore because of this competition with the public sector wages will remain fair.

Fair pay does largely come from striking, even in the private sector. There's another reason why pay is fairer in the private sector: the companies need not to pay as much as the Government, so they can focus more on paying their workers more. But this demand for improved pay comes from union action.

(Original post by mevidek)
Of course I'm asking you, but in general I'm simply asking why you libertarians are so critical of the public sector.

Ok, but I'd clearly answered both points already, so...

And yeah, I dunno really. On a similar subject, why do black people hate the KKK? I mean, what's the deal with that???

Edit: Before you get Gary's condom in a twist, that's my way of saying "Do you actually know anything at all about Libertarianism? I disagree with you, apparantly on everything, but I do at least understand the position you hold and am here to challenge you on it and discuss the various merits of our arguments. Do you honestly need me to tell you why Libertarians have a problem with the public sector?"

(Original post by mevidek)
Firstly, it was an example of the injustice - most people work harder than bankers, but get paid a lot less. I don't think it's right, which is why I gave you an example of this inequality.

Secondly, a state-controlled economy is easier for the government for pay workers the adequate amount for what they do. Even in a free market equality, there's clearly more to making salaries fairer than basing them solely on supply and demand. It should also be based on the work they do, and the hours they work.

Thirdly and finally, of course a person's skills and experience should impact their wage, but the Government can also reward people for the work they do. There's a lot more to it.

I don't think internetguru gets that under a hypothetical free market, libertarian society, wages and value are not solely based on demand and supply or "market price", you also have lots of compeition, expiriences, quality, USP, business cultures all conflicting. Since price is subjective, labour is also subjective, if everything was set at market value then the economy would never grow (inter border) and we would have to solely rely on exports for growth.

And yeah, I dunno really. On a similar subject, why do black people hate the KKK? I mean, what's the deal with that???

Edit: Before you get Gary's condom in a twist, that's my way of saying "Do you actually know anything at all about Libertarianism? I disagree with you, apparantly on everything, but I do at least understand the position you hold and am here to challenge you on it and discuss the various merits of our arguments. Do you honestly need me to tell you why Libertarians have a problem with the public sector?"

I'm going to ignore your sarcastic joke - not all libertarians are right-wing. Many libertarians I know are Socialists and have nothing against the public sector.

Yes, of course I know what Libertarianism is. I just don't understand why the libertarians on here are so critical of trade unions, and why they are so far-right.

(Original post by prog2djent)
I don't think internetguru gets that under a hypothetical free market, libertarian society, wages and value are not solely based on demand and supply or "market price", you also have lots of compeition, expiriences, quality, USP, business cultures all conflicting. Since price is subjective, labour is also subjective, if everything was set at market value then the economy would never grow (inter border) and we would have to solely rely on exports for growth.

Yes, and I'm questioning his view on basing it solely on supply and demand.

(Original post by mevidek)
Fair pay does largely come from striking, even in the private sector. There's another reason why pay is fairer in the private sector: the companies need not to pay as much as the Government, so they can focus more on paying their workers more. But this demand for improved pay comes from union action.

So every company in the world is experiencing strikes pretty much every few years? Funny how I've never met a single person who has ever been on strike before and the news never has any information on these constant strikes.

(Original post by mevidek)
Yes, of course I know what Libertarianism is. I just don't understand why the libertarians on here are so critical of trade unions, and why they are so far-right.

Because that's their politics. In the same way that your social democratic values are your politics. For most of the Libertarians here, their interaction with the state is often the negative face of it - they went to private schools, work in the private sector, and so forth. By negative I mean, they see a wage packet reduced by 32% (if not more) a month to pay for services which you and I use but they do not or have not. It's like trying to explain the beauty of Beethoven's music or the majesty of Shostakovich to a deaf person.

(Original post by internetguru)
So every company in the world is experiencing strikes pretty much every few years? Funny how I've never met a single person who has ever been on strike before and the news never has any information on these constant strikes.

No, not at all.

The strikes in the private sector aren't as publicised, and with some companies improving pay as a result of these strikes, workers would therefore be drawn to these higher-paying jobs rather than the lower-paying jobs. It's all about competition. If pay in one company goes up, the pay in other companies will go up so they do not lose workers.

(Original post by Rakas21)
No, i do support collective bargaining as that should be an option that is open to them. What i do not support is collective strike action designed to amplify any consequences of said strike action. I am not saying that negotiations should not take place, i am saying that any demands they make should be conceded to on merit rather than via threats.

Oh. Sorry. So you support collective bargaining as long as workers don't have anything to bargain with. That totally works.

They can control their own Labour by leaving one organisation and getting a job in another. They cannot however agree to work x amount of days and go on strike.

(Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
Because that's their politics. In the same way that your social democratic values are your politics. For most of the Libertarians here, their interaction with the state is often the negative face of it - they went to private schools, work in the private sector, and so forth. By negative I mean, they see a wage packet reduced by 32% (if not more) a month to pay for services which you and I use but they do not or have not. It's like trying to explain the beauty of Beethoven's music or the majesty of Shostakovich to a deaf person.

I suppose so, but I can't see how their (the TSR Libertarians') version of politics could ever work in the real world, which probably explains why a libertarian has never been voted into power here.

The strikes in the private sector aren't as publicised, and with some companies improving pay as a result of these strikes, workers would therefore be drawn to these higher-paying jobs rather than the lower-paying jobs. It's all about competition. If pay in one company goes up, the pay in other companies will go up so they do not lose workers.

yes and the pay doesn't go up in one company because of strikes. It goes up because they believe a better workforce will make them more money.